Attention "Anyone But Obama" (ABO) FReepers! If you go to the thread at the link you will will see that JimRob has "declared a truce" and hundreds of ABO FReepers are now vigorously defending their belief, which I share, that the ineligible Marxist Manchurian MUST BE DEFEATED to preserve the Republic...without fear of "the ZOT"! Please consider a DONATION not just to fund renewal of expression and amplification of your ABO views, but let's over-achieve this FReepathon to get JR his new equipment!

IMO, Free Republic and FReepers could be vital in swing states in rallying just enough conservatives to tip the election and prevent our troops from having to salute for even one day longer than necessary an ineligible Marxist committed to destroying the USA !

Islam preaches dominance of the soul, body, family, nation, and the world. In order to accomplish complete dominance.

True, and their violence seems to keep them on the front page in order to expose them. Which is a good thing.

However your list would encompase other Religions or Organizations as well. Who have political agendas and a stronghold over their followers.

The difference is they generally are not reported about as not seen as violent ....though we do now know there's "Stealth Jihad" happening across the nation ...as well as the Socialist take over...which is their religion.

I used Mussolini because he was considered the lesser of two evils, in the Hitler/Mussolini comparison. Also he was a fascist (closet socialist/corporate nepotist) to Hitler’s version of nationalized “master race” socialism.

"Being called a satanist isnt regarded as bad if you actually are one. If you are called one but arent one, thats a legitimate complaint and I am with you there."

I was called a satanist, but I am not one. I believe in Jesus Christ. In fact, I will go further and say I know that He exists, and He saved my life more than once. He is my Lord and Savior, and I am His child.

I also believe that souls can be and are reincarnated. That is why I was called a satanist, and I'm sure I will be called such again. I have also really stepped in it when I've said that I believe the souls of some animals, such as dogs, go to Heaven, and I've no doubt I'll get flak for saying it again, but I don't care, because I am free to believe what I think is true, so that's what I believe.

Yes. God wants to be God in all areas of our life. we don’t get to compartmentalize God out of certain areas of our life. Not without becoming bipolar and really suffering in the areas we’ve taken Him out of.

Look at our country and see the results of compartmentalizing God out of certain areas.

I covered that earlier. The "other guys' or (for liberals) "the other' ~ believes their religion is composed of real or revealed truths.

This is the case all across the religious spectrum.

If you are arguing that a specific religion has a specific practice that is noisome to them in the extreme, that can actually be dealt with openly in almost all cases ~ I used types of infant baptism, and the baptism of the dead.

Christianity has addressed the infant baptism over the centuries and some groups go out of their way to avoid drowning babies. Others just defer baptism until it may be done safely. Others do nothing.

Why would you say that? Not all Jews don’t believe in Jesus as their personal Savior and Lord. Have you heard of Messianic Jews? There are believing Jews.

I also don’t see why you specifically bring up Jews as opposed to any other group of people, in the context of salvation. Every person no matter who they are, needs Jesus Christ as their personal Savior and Lord.

While you're at it...give us some examples of this bigotry. So I guess...from your point of view, all religions are equal in your eyes. Muslims, Christians, Hindu's, Satanists, J.W.'s, Buddists, Mormons, etc...etc........all the same!!

..."Social Conservatives. They enter the GOP picture around 1980..... Prior they were part of the Democrat coalition.

They accepted the premise of the New Deal . They were the ones who strongly supported Carter in 1976. Their disappointment with Carter and the social turmoil of the 60s and 70s pushed them into the GOP.

However, social issues are center stage. They are not so much against big government in its organization, but in the Liberals use of it.

Why didn't they just go with the Libertarian Party? or Independents? Is their some unknown need to be part of a large collective group?

Whoever labeled you a satanist for believing in souls being reincarnated, IMO, is not correct. Satanists do not believe in reincarnation. They know people only get one life. And then they go down to hell to wait for their master Satan.

The reincarnation belief though, is not a biblical belief, and that I will tell you as one Christian from another. You only get one life, and after that, the judgment. There are no second chances and no do-overs. That is eastern mysticism, not biblical Christianity. The examples of Jesus raising people from the dead to live awhile longer temporally is not evidence of reincarnation.

Your other belief that animals have souls, IS biblically based and is correct. There are great books that discuss this topic from a biblical standpoint and reading other parts of Scripture understanding God’s initial creation and His plans for restoration in the future, there is no doubt in my mind animals have spirits and they will enjoy restoration and eternal life as God originally intended. I can let you know the books if you want, just PM me.

Well, I’m not a Christian, but I will proudly admit that the United States was built on Christian values.

I’m Jewish, but I have nothing but love in my heart for my Catholic and Protestant brothers and sisters. Nothing annoys me more when liberal “Jews” (an oxymoron to be sure-—One cannot be a Jew and a liberal. That’s like being a capitalist communist.) and their friends at the ACLU attack small towns for having a Manger Scene on the steps of their town hall. It’s like, dare I say it, being a member of the Jewish Police in the Warsaw Ghetto. The way liberals persecute Christians is far too much like the way the Nazis persecuted the Jews. I won’t stand for it.

329
posted on 05/06/2012 3:48:01 PM PDT
by Absolutely Nobama
(The Right Of You To Be You Is At Stake....Resist Cultural Marxism!)

That said, if we MUST have one them for president, I'd rather it be one who the Republicans are more likely to OPPOSE, than one who they'll roll over for - especially considering that they have the same agenda.

That bears repeating.

Also a consideration that I have seen brought up is the SCOTUS. Speculation is that if obama is in, the current conservative justices won't resign, where they might if a republican is in the White House.

I agree with your assessment of Romney and what will happen if he's in and I also don't trust him in the area of the SCOTUS. I think he'll put in liberals as fast as obama.

I heard someone today call Romney *obamney* and I think he's right.

330
posted on 05/06/2012 3:48:47 PM PDT
by metmom
( For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)

Santorum clearly pointed out many times that Romney wrote Planned Parenthood into Romneycare and that every conservative knows that if anti-abortion language isn’t written into a health care law, the courts state that it must be covered. Romney knew that too.

The entire GOP establishment is leaning toward facilitating same-sex marriage, not just Romney. That’s why we need to push back and elect candidates who are firmly against it. Make no mistake, Romney’s friendliness toward same-sex marriage is one of the reasons he has had the backing from the establishment that he has. This article has more on Romney’s record on same-sex marriage.

As a gay-marriage proponent, I was pleased to learn that then-Gov. Willard Mitt Romney, R-Mass., issued at least 189 special-issue, one-day marriage licenses to same-sex couples in 2005 alone. These documents let these 378 people enjoy nuptials officiated by relatives, friends, and others who normally do not perform weddings.

Romney enforced the court’s opinion, even though it required nothing of him, having allowed the legislature a window to act “as it may deem appropriate.”

While Team Romney argues that the court forced it to give gay couples conventional marriage licenses, the special one-day licenses are a strictly gubernatorial choice, as Massachusetts law unambiguously states.

“Even if one accepts the Goodridge decision as constitutional, the one-day permits were above and beyond what was required by the court decision; they were purely discretionary,”

Fans of gay marriage should thank Romney for these 189 or more instances in which he voluntarily used his gubernatorial authority to unite these same-sex couples so they might live happily ever after.

Foes of gay matrimony should ask Romney if he really meant it when he said, “I have never supported same-sex marriage.” If so, why did he use his discretionary power to do just that  at least 189 times?

332
posted on 05/06/2012 3:49:59 PM PDT
by JediJones
(From the makers of Romney, Bloomberg/Schwarzenegger 2016. Because the GOP can never go too far left.)

The "reincarnation" thing got you in trouble ~ there's a Bible verse that says 'men have but one life to live'. Your typical Christian is unfamiliar with the Eastern Concept called the Mandela, or Wheel of Life. There your life is but one on the wheel, but your manifestation in specific beings may take place numerous times.

This is a real dispute in Christianity though since so many people who are heirs to the Eastern Concept brought it with them into Christianity.

Some accept the idea's Biblical legitimacy by noting the "Dead in Christ' who rise up in Revelation to ask questions or to give hosannas.

Jesus himself rose from the dead.

There's certainly plenty of room for debate within the pale of Christian belief ~ but on the day to day plain it's not a big issue.

I think some confound satanism or devil worship with the other concepts in the East regarding the Demon Realm. I know Protestants have always gone hammer and tong after the Catholics over the "descended into Hell" business and over the centuries viewpoints on both sides of that particular coin have adjusted ~ and you rarely hear that issue raised anymore.

I'm trying to avoid being nonjudgmental. I have my own beliefs on these matters and they're pretty conventional. But you're not a satan worshipper for believing a soul might descend into Hell.

As I've stated several times right here some politicians, Nancy Pelosi is an example, have probably done enough evil they'll go straight to Hell ~ no purgatory ~ non stop ~ does not pass Go. Some suggest she can reform in the here and now but i doubt she can reform ~ none of us can tell if her reformation would count though.

I feel the same way. I just don’t know what to do-—Down here in Sunny Florida, you can’t abstain on any part of the ballot. You have to vote for someone, and I’m not real clear on the write-in rules. I certainly don’t want to miss my chance to send that commie pig Bill Nelson packing.

This sucks. I hate being put in this situation.

337
posted on 05/06/2012 3:54:50 PM PDT
by Absolutely Nobama
(The Right Of You To Be You Is At Stake....Resist Cultural Marxism!)

If you are arguing that a specific religion has a specific practice...

Um, I wasn't arguing anything. I just told eastforker that he wouldn't be able to win the debate he seemed to be embarked on. I wasn't involved in any discussion of baptism, drowned babies, or anything else. All I said was most people understand what a person means when they say religion is based on faith and is not something that can be definitively proven, but some people do not accept that such a statement applies to their religion.

I agree with your assessment of Romney and what will happen if he's in and I also don't trust him in the area of the SCOTUS. I think he'll put in liberals as fast as obama.

Yes, he will. Just examine his record of judicial appointments in Massachusetts for verification.

This brings us back to the dynamics of OPPOSITION. If we gain the majority in both houses of Congress this year (which is very likely), whose appointments to the Supreme Court is the Senate more likely to OPPOSE? Obama's or Romney's?

Let us not forget that either of them is likely to nominate the very same type of people to the bench. That being the case, it beggars belief that some would insist that we put someone in the White House who a Republican dominated Congress is likely to roll over for.

341
posted on 05/06/2012 3:58:31 PM PDT
by Windflier
(To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)

Dude or dudete, not sure, over the years we have tangled many times, your intolerence of the mormon religion is well known accross FR, there is no need to post any specific post, you are as guilty as Huey Long in New Orleans!

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.